I don't care to talk about things as if they are hypothetical anymore because it's sort of a disservice to myself. It's like, "Do I believe what I believe or not?"
I can understand that, which is why I thought a bit before responding to you.
I responded mostly because you have to allow other people to express themselves in just the same way. If you state things like that, you are now stating reality for other people... not just for yourself. The actual truth is that "you
believe that." Do you "know" it? I guess you can say you do, but I don't believe you do. You have no way of KNOWING it, you have no way to verify it to prove to yourself it's true, all you have is a fierce BELIEF it is true, and a fierce COMMITMENT to that truth.... and your truth claim is now stamping on other people's toes wh9o might feel THEY *know* something counter to your knowledge, just as strongly.
Who is right?
Someone's gotta be wrong.
Someone's knowledge is not quite right.
The word "know" to ME is inappropriate.
So I decided to challenge you.
But that's all I'll say about it right now.
I'm nice about it because I "get it."
Other people will not be as nice, especially if they are not Christians.
Be prepared for harsher reactions.
(Then again, you might just see that as carrying your cross.)
I'm not some narrow-minded fundamentalist, and I don't believe I'm in a state where I have everything figured out. I wasn't the same as I am now a two years or even one year ago, and I know I'll be different a year from now. That is the way things should be. As McLaren depicts in his latest book, being a Christian (or whatever flavor of Christianity you prefer i.e. Catholic, baptist, pentecostal, etc.) sort of suggests you're in a static state, and from my experience, that's really how things are. They're open to minor changes, but they have their core beliefs settled and are unwilling to change them.
Pretty much.
That's sort of my issue to pick with evangelicals and fundies.
I think life is actually change, and God is bigger than our prior understandings.
We're constantly having our knowledge and beliefs revised, reworked, and understanding life and faith in new ways.
it seems silly to fight over details we cannot prove (although, as above, those people you disagree with vehemently state they "KNOW" their truth and McLaren and others are wrong).
It makes more sense to me to always be listening, learning, growing, and not locking in things so rigidly... especially if we are claiming to be Christians / disciples and thus "followers of the supreme creator god." the way many religious people think, they seem to follow a lesser god, not a greater one.
As McLaren suggests, what is proper is to be a disciple. Being a disciple is much more like joining a karate school. You go in as a white belt, and it's obvious it's gonna take many, many years before you master your art and get to the highest ranks. You don't just join and learn a few core principles, and then you're mostly done with your learning. It's actually the outsiders who labeled the followers of Jesus as Christians, and it is no longer a label I like.
The fight to relabel Christians as "disciples" or whatever else has been around a long time. To me, the name doesn't bother me much -- every generation "rebrands" itself in order to set itself apart in some way, and the very next generation of believers then divorces itself from THAT label.
I don't have an issue with "disciple." I just tend to not get hung up on titles, in time "disciple" will be the bad word and something else will take its place.
McLaren's cool, I have a few of his books. I borrowed a Greg Boyd title from a friend over the weekend that I'm parsing through right now.